Regular bail granted where alleged assault caused simple injuries and trial was likely to be delayed.

The applicant was arrested in connection with Crime No. 272/2026 registered at Police Station Masturi, District Bilaspur, for alleged offences under Sections 118(1), 118(2), 296, 351(3) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (“BNS”).

The prosecution alleged that on 4 May 2026, following a dispute concerning the purchase of coconuts, the applicant abused and threatened Rupesh and Manharan Kewat and assaulted them with a sharp-edged scissors or knife-like weapon. Rupesh allegedly suffered injuries to his lip, arm, chest and abdomen, while Manharan sustained an injury to his back.

Section 118(2) BNS was subsequently added on the basis of medical opinion relating to injuries to Rupesh’s ear, nose and throat.

The applicant denied the allegations and claimed that the injured persons had attacked him and his mother while intoxicated. He also relied on the alleged delay between the incident and registration of the FIR, the simple nature of the injuries, and the grant of anticipatory bail to his mother, co-accused Ganpa Shrivas.

The State opposed bail, relying on the nature of the allegations and the use of a sharp-edged weapon, although it acknowledged that the MLC described the injuries as simple.

The applicant had remained in custody since 20 June 2026.

Whether the applicant was entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, in view of the allegations, the medical evidence and the circumstances of the case?

Whether the applicant’s period of custody, the simple nature of the injuries, the grant of anticipatory bail to the co-accused, and the likelihood of delay in trial justified release on bail?

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, governing the High Court’s power to grant regular bail.

In determining bail, the Court considered the nature and gravity of the allegations, the medical evidence concerning the injuries, the period of custody, the status of co-accused, and the likelihood of an early conclusion of trial.

The offences alleged were under Sections 118(1), 118(2), 296, 351(3) and 3(5) of the BNS, 2023.

No judicial precedent was cited or relied upon in the order.

After hearing both sides and examining the case diary, the Court acknowledged the allegation that the applicant had assaulted two persons with a sharp-edged scissors or knife-like weapon.

However, the Court gave decisive weight to the MLC report, which described the injuries as simple in nature.

The Court also considered that the applicant had been in custody since 20 June 2026, that the co-accused and applicant’s mother had already received anticipatory bail, and that the trial was likely to take considerable time.

Balancing these factors against the gravity of the allegations, the Court found it appropriate to exercise its power under Section 483 BNSS in favour of the applicant.

The High Court directed that Gyan @ Lukky Shriwas be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court.

The release was subject to conditions requiring him not to seek unnecessary adjournments when witnesses are present, to remain present before the trial court as directed, to appear personally on specified critical dates including opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of his statement, and to comply with proceedings relating to proclamation and attendance.

Breach or misuse of bail liberty could result in action in accordance with law.

A certified copy of the order was directed to be sent to the trial court for compliance.